@keegthomas
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The most conspicuous aspect of it all to me is that they initially prescribed the attack to a bear, because it was so incredibly savage.
When they couldn’t rule that it was a bear due to lack of evidence, it is now a “homicide” – and that’s only based on there being no evidence to prove that it was an animal.
Now none of this means it is or isn’t a sasquatch. But its quite conspicuous how a “bear attack” turns into a “homicide” when the former can’t be proven. That’s a heck of a leap to make.
A homicide is typically pretty obvious. This appeared from the onset to not be a homicide to investigators, until they determined that it couldn’t have been a bear. Seems like they are trying to smash a square peg through a round hole due to lack of evidence.
I looked this area up on Google Earth, and it looks like the approximate Lat and longs are:
Lat: 45°21’20.00″N
Long: 111° 6’48.15″WArea does seem somewhat remote. Very densely wooded and with a fair amount of elevation changes.
I looked at BFRO, and they only have four recorded sightings in this county, from 1993 – 2016. https://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_county_reports.asp?state=MT&county=Gallatin
